DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Access Options Analysis Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Access Options Analysis Report Public Access Options Analysis Report October 2013 Prepared by: and TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 2 THE PUBLIC ACCESS OPTIONS ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 3 THE PUBLIC ACCESS OPTIONS ...................................................................................... 10 EVALUATING THE PUBLIC ACCESS OPTIONS ............................................................... 15 RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AT LOWER TAYLOR CREEK ................... 40 CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS .................................................................................... 41 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................ 42 Interdepartmental Team Workshops, Community Input Opportunities, and Analysis Reports List of Figures Figure 1. Taylor Creek Watershed and the lower Taylor Creek project area 2 Figure 2. Current conditions at lower Taylor Creek 3 Figure 3a. Original process and schedule for the Public Access Options Analysis 4 Figure 3b. Revised process and schedule for the Public Access Options Analysis 4 Figure 4. Participants in the Public Access Options Analysis and their roles 5 Figure 5. The range of possible options for ownership, access and facilities at the lower 10 Taylor Creek project site Figure 6. The five public access options evaluated in this report 12-13 Figure 7. Lake shoreline access opportunities in the Lower Taylor Creek Restoration 24 Project vicinity Figure 8. Map of existing open spaces, natural areas, and parks near lower 25 Taylor Creek Figure 9. Map of the major arterials, side streets, private drive entrance, and the existing 36 crosswalk near the project site List of Tables Table 1. Comparison of public access options 14 Table 2. Evaluation criteria used in the Public Access Options Analysis 15 Table 3. Habitat Improvements evaluation 17 Table 4. City Cost, Operations, and Maintenance evaluation 20-21 Table 5. Community and Neighborhood Amenities evaluation 27-28 Table 6. Potential Neighborhood Impacts evaluation 32-34 Table 7. Traffic Safety and Mobility evaluation 38-39 Lower Taylor Creek Restoration Project Public Access Options Analysis Report i List of Acronyms ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act CPTED – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design CDWAC – Creeks, Drainage, and Wastewater Advisory Committee DON – Department of Neighborhoods Parks – Seattle Parks and Recreation Department SDOT – Seattle Department of Transportation SPD – Seattle Police Department SPU – Seattle Public Utilities RBCC – Rainier Beach Community Club RBCEC – Rainier Beach Community Empowerment Coalition RBMA – Rainier Beach Merchants Association RBMF – Rainier Beach Moving Forward RBNA – Rainier Beach Neighborhood Association WHCA – West Hill Community Association WSDOT – Washington State Department of Transportation Lower Taylor Creek Restoration Project Public Access Options Analysis Report ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Taylor Creek is located near the south end of Lake Washington in southeast Seattle. The creek originates in unincorporated King County and passes through a natural area ravine known as Deadhorse Canyon within Lakeridge Park. It then flows through residential yards and a culvert under Rainier Ave S before discharging into Lake Washington. The condition of the Rainier Ave S culvert, along with other barriers in the creek, prevents fish passage upstream to good quality habitat in Deadhorse Canyon. The lower stream is also confined in a small channel that produces poor habitat conditions and occasionally floods. In 2011, Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) and Seattle Parks and Recreation (Parks) began engaging the nearby community in discussions about habitat restoration at the site. Those discussions identified a number of concerns about how public access could affect the surrounding residential neighborhood. SPU determined that an open, collaborative process was needed to examine different options for public access to the site and the associated benefits and challenges. This “Public Access Options Analysis Report” is the product of that process. This report documents the analysis process, detailing the evaluation of public access and collaboration between SPU, Parks, the Interdepartmental Team, and the broader community, and provides a staff-level access recommendation. SPU considered five public access options – No Access, Viewpoint, Scheduled Access, Limited Access, and Open Access – and evaluated each based on six criteria – Habitat Improvements; City Cost, Operations and Maintenance; City Safety and Liability; Community and Neighborhood Amenities; Potential Neighborhood Impacts; and Traffic Safety and Mobility. Based on these criteria, City of Seattle staff recommends providing some form of Open Access to the lower Taylor Creek site, contingent upon further investigation and design around issues raised from the community during this process. This option is recommended because it is consistent with City Comprehensive and Shoreline Management goals and policies and provides broader community benefits (e.g., increased shoreline access, additional open space, education and stewardship opportunities). There are concerns about how public access may affect the stream and surrounding habitat, the immediate neighborhood, and traffic in the area. The recommendation for some form of Open Access is contingent upon designing a project that: Protects the restored habitat conditions and the fish and wildlife living in the area; Assures safe access for pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles to the site and through the area; Balances project costs with environmental and social benefits and is within budgeted resources; Minimizes adverse neighborhood changes and maximizes neighborhood amenities; Provides Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility as required; Avoids and minimizes impacts to playfield uses; and Promotes positive use of the space. Lower Taylor Creek Restoration Project Public Access Options Analysis Report 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND Taylor Creek is located near the south end of Lake Washington in southeast Seattle. The creek originates in unincorporated King County and passes through a natural area ravine known as Deadhorse Canyon within Lakeridge Park, through residential yards and a culvert under Rainier Ave S before discharging into southern Lake Washington. The culvert under Rainier Ave S is composed of privately and publicly owned segments, some of which are deteriorating. In addition, the Rainier Ave S culvert and additional barriers in the lower creek prevent fish passage upstream to good quality habitat in Deadhorse Canyon. The lower stream is also confined in a small channel with poor habitat conditions which can flood during larger storm events. Figure 1. Taylor Creek Watershed and the lower Taylor Creek project area. In 2010 and 2011, SPU purchased properties at the mouth of Taylor Creek. This introduced an opportunity for SPU, in coordination with Parks, to: Replace the public culvert under Rainier Ave S to ensure public safety and mobility; Remove the last fish passage barriers between Lake Washington and Deadhorse Canyon; Improve the stream channel and surrounding habitat, particularly for Chinook salmon; and Address storm-related flooding and sediment deposition at the mouth of the creek as possible. Lower Taylor Creek Restoration Project Public Access Options Analysis Report 2 THE PUBLIC ACCESS OPTIONS ANALYSIS Between 2010 and 2012, SPU began developing stream improvement concepts and discussing those concepts with the community near lower Taylor Creek. Adjacent neighbors were concerned about the potential for the lower Taylor Creek project site to shift from a private residential property to a publicly accessible space. SPU, in partnership with Parks, undertook a collaborative process with the community to evaluate, recommend, and ultimately decide on the type of public access that would be allowed at the project site. Early Community Input In August 2011, SPU hosted a meeting at the project site for nearby neighbors to learn about SPU’s preliminary habitat restoration concepts and provide their feedback on the design concepts. Following this initial meeting, SPU held an informational public meeting in February 2012 with the broader community. During these early conversations, nearby community members raised concerns about negative impacts associated with the property becoming accessible to the Figure 2. Current conditions at lower Taylor Creek. public. These concerns ranged from the potential of increased traffic on the private drive and undesirable activities taking place on the new City property, to decreased pedestrian safety for users crossing Rainier Ave S. While community members generally supported the habitat improvements, particularly for endangered salmon, they were also uneasy about the project potentially affecting the neighborhood in a negative way. Undertaking the Public Access Options Analysis SPU began a Public Access Options Analysis in early 2013, in partnership with Parks, which may eventually own and manage the site. The purpose of this process (Figure 3a) was to evaluate a variety of options for public access at the lower Taylor Creek site using six criteria. The analysis included several opportunities for the community
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2019 Annual Waste Prevention & Recycling Report
    s 2019 ANNUAL WASTE PREVENTION & RECYCLING REPORT i Submitted to Seattle City Council (SCC) October 2020 [Page deliberately left blank] ii CONTENTS GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................................................. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Key Results................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Next Steps .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Seattle’s Recycling Rate Goals ................................................................................................................................... 3 Moving Upstream ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Annual Waste Prevention & Recycling Report..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2016-12-31 Response.Esf04annex
    CITY OF SEATTLE CEMP EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #4 - FIREFIGHTING Operations .................................................................................................................................... 10-4 11. APPENDIX 3 – Terrorist Attack – Weapons of Masss Destruction ......................................... 11-6 Situation ....................................................................................................................................... 11-6 Assumptions ................................................................................................................................. 11-6 Definitions .................................................................................................................................... 11-6 Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Incidents ............................ 11-7 12. APPENDIX 4 – Emergency Medical Services ......................................................................... 12-8 Situation ....................................................................................................................................... 12-8 Assumptions ................................................................................................................................. 12-8 Definitions .................................................................................................................................... 12-8 Operations ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Public Utilities Customer Review Panel C/O [email protected] P.O
    Appendix G Seattle Public Utilities Customer Review Panel c/o [email protected] P.O. Box 34018, Seattle WA 98124-4018 January 20, 2021 Mayor Jenny A. Durkan The City of Seattle 600 Fourth Avenue P.O. Box 94749 Seattle, WA 98124-4749 RE: Seattle Public Utilities Customer Review Panel Comments on the Proposed SPU Strategic Business Plan for 2021-2026 Dear Mayor Durkan: This letter presents our comments on the Proposed Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) Strategic Business Plan for 2021-2026 (Plan) in fulfillment of our duties as members of the Seattle Public Utilities Customer Review Panel (Panel) set forth in Resolution 31800. We endorse the Plan and support its adoption as presented. This letter includes a number of detailed comments regarding the Plan. Our primary messages regarding the Plan are as follows: Rates: We are pleased that the projected 6-year rate path is lower than that in the previous strategic plan: the 6-year weighted average annual rate increase across all SPU’s lines of business in the 2021-2026 period is projected to be 4.2%, down from 5.2% in the 2018-2023 SPU Strategic Business Plan. SPU’s commitment to drive rates down is admirable and should continue to be a priority. SPU provides essential basic services – water, sewer, drainage, solid waste collection and disposal. Ensuring the affordability of these services, particularly for lower income customers and smaller businesses, is a priority for the Panel. That said, the reduction in rates compared to the last plan has largely been accomplished by spending of cash reserves built up over the last three years because SPU’s capital project accomplishment rate was far less than anticipated.
    [Show full text]
  • This Application May Be Used to Enroll Customers in the Following Programs: Utility Discount Program, the Seattle Public Utilit
    ☐ SPU-EAP-206-684-5800 th To Submit by Mail -700-5 Ave Ste# 2832 ☐ Seattle, WA 98124 ELIA - 206-684-3688 City of Seattle ☐ PROJECT SHARE ____ To Submit by Fax- 206.287.5356 Assistance Programs Application ☐ $20 Car Tab Rebate ___ Email: [email protected] OR [email protected] ☐ UDP-206-684-5788 Pleas This application may be used to enroll customers in the following programs: Utility Discount Program, The Seattle Public Utility Emergency Assistance Program (SPU-EAP), Project Share, The Emergency Low-Income Assistance Program (ELIA), and the $20 Car Tab Rebate Program. Eligibility is based on meeting each individual program enrollment criteria, meeting annual income criteria, and based on the date the completede check application all that apply is received or by the city. Applications are processed in the order they are received. call if you have questions ☐ Government issued Identification for all persons 18 years and older. Please provide a Copy of one of the items below for each adult: • State driver’s license • State identification card • Passport or Permanent Resident Card ☐ Please provide your Food Assistance SNAP benefits client ID or your social security number below to provide verification of gross income to enroll in the UDP Program. SNAP Benefits Client ID: OR Social Security #: - - ☐ If you are not on SNAP, please provide income documentation for ALL persons 18 years old and older living in your home. Please provide verification of GROSS income received in the previous month: . • Paycheck stubs/ Employer statement
    [Show full text]
  • C I T Y O F S E a T T L E, W a S H I N G T
    C I T Y O F S e a t t l e, W a s h i n g t o n 2002 Adopted Budget Ordinance 120640 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER In response to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), material from the budget is available from the City of Seattle Budget Office in alternative formats. To make a request, or for more information, please call Linda Wokal at (206) 684-8089. CITY OF SEATTLE 2002 ADOPTED BUDGET MAYOR PAUL SCHELL SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL Margaret Pageler, Council President Jim Compton Jan Drago Richard McIver Peter Steinbrueck Richard Conlin Nick Licata Judy Nicastro Heidi Wills DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE CITY BUDGET OFFICE Dwight Dively, Director Joan E. Walters, Budget Director Linda Wokal, Administrative Assistant Janice Pratt, Receptionist Arts, Culture, and Neighborhoods Public Safety and Human Services Team Team Jan Oscherwitz, Lead Doug Carey, Lead Lee Belland Elise Downer Marilynne Gardner Anne Friedlander Sara Levin Barbara Gangwer Carrie McCann Cheryl Swab Helen Welborn Karl Stickel Economics Team Utilities, Transportation, and Glen Lee, Lead Administration Team Janet Credo Jim Echert, Lead Dave Hennes Jeff Davis Tom Kirn Thomas Dunlap JoEllen Kuwamoto Greg Hill Stephen Land Cameron Keyes Erik Sund Carol Mikkelsen Greg Petersen Credits CBO thanks the following, who provided valuable proofreading assistance: Lisa Peyer, Meg Gordon, Diane Clausen, Carolyn Iblings, Eve Sternberg, Tim Morrison. CBO thanks Jan Gibson, Kim Roberts, Jim Waters, Jim Ackerman, Donna Taylor, and Tere Quade-Hepburn of City Design, Print & Copy for their work in printing the CIP. Cover Design: Jay Keiler, Graphic Arts Designer, City Design, Print & Copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Public Utilities Water System Synopsis As of June 21, 2021
    Seattle Public Utilities Water System Synopsis as of June 21, 2021 Cumulative Precipitation Snowpack (Snow Water Equivalent) Weighted Average Cedar/Tolt Weighted Average Cedar/Tolt 120 70 WY 2021 100 60 WY 2020 50 Median WY 1990 - 2019 80 40 60 30 Inches 40 WY 2021 Inches 20 WY 2020 20 Average WY 1990-2019 10 0 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Precipitation was recorded in the Cedar River and South Fork Tolt The average snow accumulation across the sites that we monitor is River Watersheds over the past week. estimated to be about 3.4 inches snow water equivalent which is above the long term median for this time of the year. Combined Reservoir Storage Average 7-Day Water Consumption 50 300 275 WY 2021 40 250 225 WY 2020 200 Average WY 2010-2019 30 175 WY 2021 150 20 WY 2020 125 100 Average WY 1990-2019 75 10 50 Low Reservoir Conditions 25 Millions of GallonsMillionsDay ofper Billions ofofBillions Storage GallonsActive 0 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep The combined reservoir storage of Chester Morse Lake, Masonry Water use over the past week averaged about 142 million gallons Pool, Lake Youngs and South Fork Tolt Reservoir is above the long per day (mgd), which is above the 140 mgd used during the same term average for this time of the year.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Watercourses
    City of Seattle State of the Waters 2007 Volume I: Seattle Watercourses State of the Waters 2007 Volume I Table of Contents Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................xi Contents of the 2007 State of the Waters Report.................................................................................xiii Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................xiv Key Findings................................................................................................................................... xv Factors Affecting Seattle Watercourses .........................................................................................xvi Watershed-Scale Conditions.....................................................................................................xvi Stream-Scale Conditions ........................................................................................................xviii Biological Communities............................................................................................................ xx Part 1 Introduction .............................................................................................1 Understanding the State of Seattle Waters.............................................................................................. 1 Overview of Seattle-Area Water Bodies................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order 2020-05: COVID-19 Civil Emergency Further Extension of City Closures and Relief Measures
    Office of the Mayor City of Seattle Jenny A. Durkan, Mayor Executive Order 2020-05: COVID-19 Civil Emergency Further Extension of City Closures and Relief Measures An Executive Order directing City departments to further extend its actions to combat the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and to mitigate the impact of the public health emergency on the people of Seattle. WHEREAS, in my capacity as Mayor, I proclaimed that a civil emergency exists in the City of Seattle in the Mayoral Proclamation of Civil Emergency dated March 3, 2020; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Public Health – Seattle & King County issued guidance recommending that people at higher risk of severe illness should stay home and away from large groups of people as much as possible, including public places; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, I issued Executive Order 2020-03 to provide assistance to Seattle’s small businesses and their workers; and WHEREAS, Executive Order 2020-03 also directed Seattle Public Utilities and Seattle City Light to enroll more customers in the Utility Discount Program, exercise flexibility with customers, including instituting payment plans, and avoid utility shutoffs whenever possible; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, Washington Governor Jay Inslee prohibited all gatherings of 250 or more in western Washington and Dr. Jeff Duchin, Health Officer for Public Health – Seattle & King County also prohibited gatherings of 250 or less unless certain precautions were undertaken; and WHEREAS, as a result, on March 12, 2020, I directed the Seattle Public Library
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 SPU's Risk and Resiliency Assessment and Framework
    SPU’s RISK AND RESILIENCY ASSESSMENT AND FRAMEWORK 2019 Final Report Seattle Public 2019 SPU RISK AND RESILIENCY ASSESSMENT AND FRAMEWORK - 1 Utilities Table of Contents Page Section 3 Section 1: Introduction 7 Section 2: Climate Change 12 Section 3: Disasters 17 Section 4: Investment Priorities 21 Section 5: Economy 24 Section 6: Market Forces 26 Section 7: Technology 28 Section 8: Workforce 31 Section 9: Next Steps 32 Appendix A: Impact-Likelihood Matrix 2019 SPU RISK AND RESILIENCY ASSESSMENT AND FRAMEWORK - 2 Section 1: Introduction Organizations today are faced with multiple risks and uncertainties as they work to fulfill their missions. Being resilient offers a powerful way of addressing risks comprehensively, managing uncertainty, and taking advantage of new opportunities. For Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), resiliency is the capacity to recover in the face of sudden or gradual stressors that impact utility services and the community. SPU delivers essential water, drainage and wastewater, and solid waste services – all fundamental for public and environmental health. Seattle has been a leader in making utility investments that have multiple, long-term community benefits. After the Great Seattle Fire of 1889, the citizens of Seattle voted to create a public water system and develop the Cedar River water supply system. Seattle’s water, drainage, wastewater, and solid waste utilities have faced many challenges over the years and have evolved to improve services and reduce pollution impacts. As a community-centered utility, SPU seeks to proactively address community needs and risks to improve resiliency. In 2017, Seattle City Council requested that SPU “prepare a risk and resiliency management assessment.” SPU delivered the status report to Council on August 1, 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Public Utilities
    Seattle Public Utilities Ray Hoffman, Director (206) 684-3000 http://www.seattle.gov/util/ Department Overview Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) provides reliable, efficient and environmentally conscious utility services to enhance the quality of life and livability in all communities SPU serves. SPU operates three distinct utilities: Drainage and Wastewater, Solid Waste and Water. The three utilities each have unique revenue sources and capital improvement projects, but share many operations and administration activities within SPU and the City. Drainage and Wastewater: The Drainage and Wastewater Utility collects and disposes or discharges storm runoff and wastewater from residences, businesses, institutions and public properties within the City. In addition to handling sewage and storm water runoff, Drainage and Wastewater works with other government agencies and private parties to address Federal EPA-mandated sediment cleanup projects where contamination is linked to storm water or sewage, such as Gas Works Park and the Lower Duwamish Waterway. The drainage and wastewater system includes approximately 448 miles of sanitary sewers, 968 miles of combined sewers, 477 miles of storm drains, 68 pump stations, 90 permitted combined sewer overflow outfalls, 295 storm drain outfalls, 189 stormwater quality treatment facilities, 145 flow control facilities, and 38 combined sewer overflow control detention tanks and pipes. Solid Waste: The Solid Waste Utility collects and processes recycling, compostables, and residential and commercial garbage to promote quality of life, environmental stewardship, public health and safety. The City owns and operates two transfer stations, two household hazardous waste facilities, a fleet of trucks and heavy equipment and two closed landfills. The Solid Waste Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) supports the transfer stations, heavy equipment and post-closure projects on two landfills previously used by the City.
    [Show full text]
  • November 28, 2017 – November 28, 2020 Mayor Jenny A. Durkan a Year of Unprecedented and Historic Challenges for the City of Seattle
    Three Years of Action November 28, 2017 – November 28, 2020 Mayor Jenny A. Durkan A Year of Unprecedented and Historic Challenges for the City of Seattle This time last year, our city was booming, vibrant, and focused on the future. Everything seemed possible. But 2020 had other plans. This has been a brutal year for everyone in Seattle. A pandemic with no federal leadership is having devastating im- pacts on the lives and health of our communities and families. It also led to skyrocketing unemployment and closure of so many of Seattle’s small businesses. The City has also seen unforeseen challenges like the accelerated cracking of the West Seattle Bridge, the collapse of a pier and days of wildfire smoke at dangerous levels. We also are in the midst of a civil rights and racial reckoning, which requires each one of us to commit to dismantling the systems of inequity that have had generational negative impacts on Black communities. In the midst of one of the most challenging moments in our city’s history, our 12,000 City of Seattle employees have focused on delivering essential services amidst a pandemic, and advanced our shared priorities to: • Help our residents, workers, and small businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic • Make the City’s largest-ever investment in racial equity and advancing opportunity • Address our homelessness and housing crisis • Build true community safety while also re-imagining policing Working together, we will get through this unimaginably challenging time for our city. There is hope on the horizon in 2021 with an administration that will help cities, improved treatment for COVID-19 and the development of promising new vaccines.
    [Show full text]
  • After the Fire
    After the Fire Information and Resources for Recovering from a Fire Important Information Date of Fire: ________________________________________________ Time of Fire: _______________________________________________ Location of Fire: ___________________________________________ Fire Incident Report Number: __________________________ Fire Marshal or Investigator: ___________________________ Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3-4 Protect Yourself 5 Re-Entering Your Home 6 Protect our Property 7 Important Documents 8 Documents and Tax Tips 9 Reclaiming Paper Money, Coin, Savings Bonds 10 Books 11 Medicine, Cosmetics and Food 12 Cleaning Tips 13-16 Contacts and Resources 17-18 Page 2 Introduction Why are there holes in my roof? Why are the windows and doors broken? Fire produces temperatures of over 1,200 degrees, along with smoke and hot toxic gases. At times, it is necessary to reduce the heat, smoke and hot gases before firefighters can enter a building to put out a fire and rescue any occupants. Venting the smoke and gases must be done quickly to speed the rescue effort, as well as to prevent the fire from spreading. Cutting holes in the roof or breaking windows helps with this task. Often, walls must be forcibly opened to find “hidden” fires. The fire is not out until every “hot spot” is found. After the fire is out, damage from fighting the fire may appear unnecessary, however, without the use of these firefighting and rescue techniques, lives could be lost and the building could suffer total destruction by fire. Page 3 Introduction Can I re-enter my home? What if my house is uninhabitable? Use caution in re-occupying your home.
    [Show full text]